Journal of Endovascular Therapy最新文献

Purpose: To present a novel technique for the treatment of heavily calcified aorto-iliac disease using intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) and self-expanding bare-metal stents (BMS).

Technique: We present our experience with 4 cases of calcified aorto-iliac disease that were treated with IVL as vessel preparation followed by BMS deployment. Intravascular lithotripsy was performed using a 7-mm or 8-mm Shockwave catheter from 1 access and a non-compliant balloon introduced from the second access in a "hugging-balloon" configuration. Afterward, a self-expandable BMS is deployed in the infrarenal aorta and additional bare-metal balloon-mounted stents are deployed in the iliac arteries as needed. This technique provides a low-profile solution with only 6- and 7-French introducers, preservation of the collateral circulation while also preserving the option for an up-and-over approach in the future. Technical success was achieved in all cases and no periprocedural complications were observed.

Conclusion: Intravascular lithotripsy in combination with BMS for the infrarenal aorta and the aortic bifurcation seems to be a safe and effective low-profile treatment option for heavily calcified lesions. Large-scale studies with long-term follow-up are needed to validate our positive early results.Clinical ImpactEndovascular treatment of heavily calcified aortoiliac disease poses significant challenges, including the risk of rupture and dissection. The proposed technique uses intravascular lithotripsy and bare-metal stenting of the aortic bifurcation and represents a low-profile solution that preserves collaterals and potentially reduces the risk of dissection with IVL vessel preparation.

Purpose: This study aimed to assess the feasibility and short-term outcomes of different manufactured proximal and distal stent graft components during fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR).

Materials and methods: A multicenter retrospective review was conducted at 3 aortic centers, involving all consecutive patients who underwent FEVAR utilizing a customized Dacron-based tubular proximal and a distal bifurcated polytetrafluoreten (PTFE)-based commercially available stent grafts. Primary outcomes were 30 day mortality, major adverse events, and technical and clinical success. Secondary outcomes assessed stent graft migration, occurrence of types I/III endoleak, and reintervention.

Results: A total of 23 FEVAR cases across all centers were included in this study. Technical success was achieved in all cases, with a median procedure time of 183 (153-244) minutes. There were no major adverse events, except for 1 transient acute renal failure. The median follow-up period was 23 (17-28) months. All target vessels retained patent with the exception of 1 right renal fenestration that showed signs of kinking at the first follow-up, and despite secondary intervention with relining and distal extension, there was an occlusion afterward and 1 hepatic artery with a separate fenestration. This and 1 successful relining of a superior mesenteric artery kink were the only reinterventions in this cohort. One case of persistent type 1b endoleak was reported in a patient with chronic type B aortic dissection, which resolved with distal extension on the external iliac artery 5 months after the index procedure. No deaths occurred throughout the follow-up with, and there were no signs of stent graft migration or type 3 endoleak.

Conclusion: The use of commercially available PTFE-based bifurcated stent grafts to extend distally the tubular graft appears to be a feasible approach during FEVAR, with promising short-term outcomes. Further studies are necessary to define the applicability of this solution and evaluate long-term outcomes.Clinical ImpactThis multicentric study on fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) demonstrates the feasibility and good short-term outcomes of utilizing a PTFE-based commercially available stent graft to extend the proximal tubular custom-made fenestrated stent graft. The high technical success rate, absence of major adverse events, and low occurrence of complications such as stent graft migration and endoleaks highlight the potential clinical benefits of this approach with an off-the-shelf distal extension whose delivery system does not cross the fenestrations intraoperatively.

Purpose: In some cases of endovascular thoracoabdominal or juxtarenal aortic aneurysm repair, a thoracic endograft in combination with a fenestrated renovisceral device may be needed in order to create a sufficient proximal landing zone. This study aimed to evaluate the technical aspects and postoperative morbidity of a single- or 2-stage approach.

Methods: Eighty-seven consecutive patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in combination with elective fenestrated repair (fenestrated endovascular aortic repair [FEVAR]; fenestrated Anaconda device) from 2015 to 2022 were included in this retrospective bicentric study. Underlying pathologies, aortic morphology, technical details, and postoperative morbidity were recorded.

Results: Single-staged ("1S," n=61) and 2-staged ("2S," n=26) interventions were compared. Indications were thoracoabdominal aneurysms (TAAAs) (Crawford I-IV) (n=56, 64%) and juxtarenal aneurysms (n=31, 36%). In 2S, the proportion of TAAA was higher than in 1S (2S: 77%, 1S: 59%; p=0.001). In 2S, the covered length of the descending aorta was longer (1S: 128±60 mm, 2S: 202±64 mm; p=0.003). Temporary aneurysm sack perfusion (TASP) was established in 11 (18%) of 1S and 1 (4%) of 2S patients (p=0.079), as well as cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage catheter in 48 (79%) of 1S and 19 (73%) of 2S. The rate of spinal cord ischemia (SCI) and the severity of SCI were not different in both groups, with a total of 3 cases of persisting paraplegia. The rate of access complications was higher in 2S (n=6, 23%) than in 1S (n=4, 7%; p=0.027). Postoperative 30 day morbidity did not significantly differ in both groups and neither did 30 day mortality (4.6% in 1S vs 3.8% in 2S; p=0.083).

Conclusion: The combination of TEVAR and FEVAR using a fenestrated endograft is feasible and safe. Aortic morphology does not change significantly after endovascular repair. A single-staged strategy is feasible with excellent results, especially in Crawford IV, Crawford V, or juxtarenal aneurysms. Two-staged repair is recommended in cases with long aortic coverage and a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class. Follow-up data are needed to evaluate the long-term stability of the TEVAR/FEVAR interconnection.Clinical impactOur study has revealed the safety and efficacy of the combination of TEVAR and FEVAR in the treatment of TAAAs and juxtarenal aneurysms with compromised supravisceral landing zones. A single-staged concept is not necessary in all cases. Staged procedures may reduce postoperative morbidity in cases with long aortic coverage and higher ASA class.

Objectives: Type I and III endoleaks following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) can lead to catastrophic events that require major re-interventions. We reviewed our experience with aortic endograft re-interventions for type I and III endoleaks and other serious failures among different devices.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients with a prior EVAR who underwent open conversion (OC) or major endovascular intervention (MEI) (re-lining, cuff/limb extension, parallel graft) for type I/III endoleaks at our institution from 2002 to 2019. Baseline characteristics, procedural details, re-interventions, and outcomes were collected.

Results: A total of 229 patients (194 men) underwent re-interventions for type I and III endoleaks after EVAR (90 OC, 139 MEI) for devices implanted between 1997 and 2019. Average age at re-intervention was 78±8.5 years. A total of 135 (59%) were implanted at our institution, whereas 93 (41%) were referred. Median time to re-intervention was 4 years with 25% to 75% interquartile range (IQR) of 2.2-6.6 years. There was no significant difference in baseline demographics or type of re-interventions (OC/MEI) between device types. 42/229 (18%) presented with ruptured aneurysms, 20/229 (9%) were symptomatic, whereas the rest presented with asymptomatic radiographic findings. Type 1A endoleak was present in 146/229 (63.8%-72 with proximal migration), type IB in 46/229 (20.1%), type IIIA in 37/229 (16.6%), type IIIB in 15/229 (6.5%), and persistent aneurysm sac growth with no radiographic evidence of an endoleak in 6/229 (2.6%). Devices included most commercial products: AFX, Excluder, AneuRx, Ancure, Endurant, and Zenith. A smaller number of investigational devices accounted for the rest. Type 1A endoleak was the most common indication for re-intervention among all devices except for AFX and ancure devices, proximal migration was a frequent presentation with AneuRx. AFX devices more frequently presented with a type III and ancure devices more frequently presented with a type IB endoleak.

Conclusions: Serious failure modes after EVAR differ between endografts and occur throughout the follow-up period. This is important to guide targeted interrogation of surveillance studies and follow-up schedules, even for discontinued devices, as well as comparisons between various series and estimation of EVAR failure rates.Clinical ImpactSurveillance after EVAR is critical for long term success of the repair, understanding of the differential modes of failure of every graft available is important in the longitudinal evaluation of these endografts. Equally important is the understanding of the modes of failure of legacy endografts that are no longer on the market but still being followed, in order to be able to tailor a surveillance regiemn and the evntual repair if needed.

Background: Secondary aortic intervention (SAI) following thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is not uncommon. However, a satisfactory management system has not been established for these patients. We aimed to report our single-center experience with SAI after prior TEVAR for type B aortic dissection (TBAD).

Methods: From January 2010 to May 2017, 860 eligible patients with TBAD underwent TEVAR. One hundred seven (12.4%) patients required SAI, either endovascularly (n=76) or surgically (n=31). The main indications for SAI were entry flow (n=58 [54.2%]), aneurysm expansion of the proximal or remote aorta (n=26 [24.3%]), retrograde type A aortic dissection (n=11 [10.3%]), distal stent-graft-induced new entry tear (n=6 [5.6%]), and stent migration (n=4 [3.7%]). The Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to determine the degree of freedom from SAI and the prognosis. Cox proportional hazards were used to screen for risk factors for SAI and poor prognosis.

Results: The overall 30-day mortality rate after SAI was 4.7% (n=5): endovascular (n=2 [2.6%]) vs open surgery (n=3 [9.7%]; p=0.145). The cumulative survival rates with or without SAI were 86.3%±3.6% vs 95.7%±0.8% at 3 years and 82.0%±4.2% vs 92.2%±1.1% at 5 years, respectively (log-rank p<0.001). Although no significant difference in survival was observed, the incidence of SAI was significantly greater in patients who underwent TEVAR during the chronic phase (acute [11.6%] vs subacute [9.6%] vs chronic [27.8]; p<0.001). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that prior TEVAR in the chronic phase (hazard ratio [HR]=1.73, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.03-2.90; p=0.039), maximum aortic diameter (HR=1.05, 95% CI=1.04-1.07; p<0.001), and arch involvement (HR=1.48, 95% CI=1.01-2.18; p=0.048) were predictors of the incidence of SAI. In addition, the maximum aortic diameter was demonstrated to be the only risk factor for prognosis after adjusting for confounding factors.

Conclusions: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair for chronic TBAD patients should be reconsidered. Open surgery is preferable for those with proximal progression, whereas endovascular treatment is more suitable for distal lesions. Close surveillance and timely reintervention after TEVAR, whether via endovascular techniques or open surgery, are necessary to prevent devastating complications.Clinical ImpactThe management of patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is challenging. We summarized our single-center experience regarding secondary aortic intervention after TEVAR for TBAD. We found that TEVAR for chronic TBAD patients should be carefully evaulated, and open surgery is recommended for those with proximal progession, while endovascular treatment is more preferable for distal lesions.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to present the covered endovascular reconstruction of the iliac artery bifurcation (CERIB) technique as a revascularization option for aorto-iliac occlusive disease (AIOD) involving the iliac artery bifurcation.

Methods: This was a retrospective single-center study including all patients undergoing a CERIB procedure from January 2021 until December 2022. Covered endovascular reconstruction of the iliac artery bifurcation procedures were performed percutaneously with bilateral femoral access, excepting cases where simultaneous open femoral artery reconstruction was required due to the extension of peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Standard patient, procedural, and follow-up (FU) data including survival and arterial reinterventions were gathered and analyzed.

Results: A total of 13 patients were included (11/13 male, median age=70 [60-76] years). Additional open and/or endovascular procedures included endarterectomy of the femoral bifurcation (n=6), rotational atherectomy (n=2), and 1 axillary artery cutdown for upper limb access (n=1). Median operating time was 2.9 hours (1.5-4.9 hours); median radiation duration and dose were 28.4 (14.3-63.3 minutes) and 4090.6 (384.4-9430.1 cGray/cm²), respectively. The stent grafts used for CERIB were BeGraft peripheral n=31, BeGraft Aortic n=4 and BeGraft peripheral plus n=1 (Bentley InnoMed GmbH, Hechingen, Germany). In 2 patients with prior stenting of the common iliac artery (CIA), only the internal and external iliac arteries (IIA and EIA) were treated in this study, and in 2 cases, additional uncovered stents were required for relining. Technical success was 100%. During a midterm FU (median 18 [4-31] months), 2 patients died from cardiovascular reasons and 1 patient with prior iliac stenting required reinterventions for recurring occlusion.

Conclusion: Covered endovascular reconstruction of the iliac artery bifurcation is a straightforward option for treating AIOD involving the iliac artery bifurcation that allows preservation of internal iliac artery perfusion and shows good early and midterm results. Prior iliac artery stenting may be a risk factor for early occlusion after CERIB.Clinical impactAorto-iliac occlusive disease with involvement of the internal iliac artery is encountered regularly in vascular surgical practice, but the internal iliac artery is often not included in the revascularization strategy. The present article will increase the awareness for the relevance of including the internal iliac artery in revascularization strategies and presents CERIB as another method to be added to the armamentarium of (endo-)vascular surgeons and interventionalists.

Background: Thrombotic material in the non-aneurysmatic and non-atherosclerotic aorta is a rare entity without any recommended standard treatment so far. We present a successful treatment strategy for patients who do not fit into any of the common approaches.

Case report: A free-floating thrombus in the descending aorta was found as source of embolism in an 82-year-old female patient with lower limb ischemia. After initial heparinization of the patient without relevant reduction of the thrombotic mass, the thrombus was removed using an interdisciplinary approach. Under echocardiographic guidance to locate the thrombus, the AngioVac device, usually licensed to remove floating thrombi from the venous system, was used off-label to remove the thrombus by a transfemoral approach. To avoid rebuilding of a new thrombus, the attachment point with an exulcerated plaque in the descending aorta was covered by a stent graft via the same femoral access. The patient did not experience any further embolic events, and the postoperative course was uncomplicated.

Conclusion: Patients with uncommon aortic diseases, such as the reported free-floating thrombus, should be treated by an individualized, interdisciplinary approach. Besides the recommended treatment options, there are other uncommon approaches that might offer an alternative in complex cases.Clinical ImpactEvidence is rare for the treatment of a free-floating thrombus in the descending aorta and the treatment strategy remains discussed controversially. We present a rather uncommon approach of successful off-label treatment for patients who do not fit into any of the common approaches (operative, endovascular, or conservative treatment based on patient's comorbidities). The AngioVac System has already been successfully used off-label in the arterial system but not in the above presented way of treating a free-floating thrombus in a patient with high embolization risk and treatment-limiting comorbidities.

Purpose: This trial was designed and aimed to compare safety and efficacy of Obtura™ vascular closure device (VCD) to manual compression (MC) among patients undergoing transfemoral catheterization.

Material and methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter trial of Obtura VCD against MC randomized patients in 1:1 (n=268; 134:134) ratio. Safety and efficacy were measured by primary endpoints (time to hemostasis [TTH] and deployment success) and secondary endpoints which included technical success, device-related adverse events, and time to ambulation (TTA).

Results: The procedural access using right femoral artery was performed in 95.52% of patients in Obtura VCD versus 96.27% in standard MC method, whereas 2.99% of patients in each group underwent left femoral access. Bilateral access was performed in 1.49% (n=2) versus 0.75% (n=1) in Obtura VCD versus MC, respectively. Both the technical success and deployment success were 100%. Patients in Obtura VCD group had shorter TTH (3.26±3.39 vs 23.95±8.24 minutes; p<0.0001) and TTA (155.44±125.32 vs 723.84±197.98 minutes; p<0.0001) than MC group. No access site complications (re-bleeding, infection, arteriovenous fistula, and transient access site nerve injury) were noted at 2-week, 1-month, and 3-month follow-ups. There were 4 (3%) and 6 (4.5%) cases of hematoma, respectively, in Obtura VCD versus MC and 1 case (0.7%) of post-procedural arterial pseudoaneurysm each in both the groups which were successfully resolved and patients were discharged with no further complications. Further follow-up was without any adverse events.

Conclusions: The study demonstrated favorable safety and efficacy of Obtura™ VCD with a significantly short TTH and TTA compared to MC.Clinical ImpactIn patients undergoing cardiac catheterization, vascular closure devices (VCDs) can achieve hemostasis faster after successful implantation of the device with fewer complications such as bleeding and ambulation can be achieved faster. In terms of effectiveness, Obtura VCD was found to be better than manual compression in achieving early hemostasis and higher technical and deployment success was accomplished. Obtura VCD does not require enlargement of the route through the tissues, uses the same existing arterial sheath as its conduit, and does not cause patients' access sites to feel uncomfortable while it is being deployed.

Background: Surgical endarterectomy is currently considered the front-line therapy for the treatment of calcified lesions in the common femoral artery (CFA). Endovascular interventions have evolved, and their use is increasing in frequency. Intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) has shown promising safety and effectiveness in calcified CFA lesions in a small pilot study, but "real-world" evidence from a larger cohort is lacking.

Methods: The Disrupt PAD III Observational Study (NCT02923193) was a prospective, multicenter registry designed to assess the acute safety and effectiveness of IVL treatment for calcified peripheral arterial disease. Any concomitant treatment with other calcium-modifying technologies as well as definitive treatment strategies was at the discretion of the operators. Patients with CFA lesions were evaluated for acute angiographic safety and effectiveness outcomes following IVL treatment as determined by an independent angiographic core lab.

Results: Common femoral artery treatment was indicated in 177 patients (n=163 could be analyzed based on core-laboratory data) enrolled at 23 sites. Characteristics for 164 treated lesions included moderate-severe calcification 95.1%, diameter stenosis 74.8±17.7%, and lesion length 53.6±53.1 mm. Concomitant calcium-modifying therapy was used in 32.3% of lesions. Final therapy included drug-coated balloons in 68.9% and stenting in 16.5% of lesions. Post-IVL and final residual stenoses were 29.2±16.5%and 23.6±11.5%, respectively. No vascular complications (flow-limiting dissections, perforations, embolization, slow or no reflow, or abrupt closure) were present at the end of the procedure by core-laboratory assessment, with 1 (0.8%) flow-limiting dissection initially occurring immediately following IVL treatment.

Conclusion: This study represents the largest real-world experience of IVL treatment in heavily calcified CFA lesions. Intravascular lithotripsy treatment showed significant stenosis reduction and favorable periprocedural safety in this challenging patient population.Clinical ImpactIn this study we show that calcified common femoral artery disease can be safely and effectively treated with shockwave balloon angioplasty with high procedural success and low complication rates and in clinical practice can now be offered as an alternative to surgical treatment in those patients reluctant to or high risk for vascular surgery. This opens another option for clinicians to treat calcified common femoral artery disease without the risk of dissection, perforation or distal embolization that are associated with atherectomy. This study shows that shockwave lithoplasty offers an innovative plaque modification technology to tackle calcified disease in the common femoral artery.

Introduction: Physician-modified fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (PM-FBEVAR) for the aortic arch provides a minimally invasive treatment option for patients who are too high-risk for open repair. Improvements in technique are gained with ongoing experience with these complex repairs. This study aims to describe outcomes of arch PM-FBEVAR and technical lessons.

Materials and methods: A retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent PM-FBEVAR with zone 0 proximal sealing at a single institution between January 2019 and July 2023 was performed. Cases completed using initial techniques (early technique) were compared with cases using the current techniques (current technique). Modification technique changed to include a self-orienting spine trigger wire and anatomically specific fenestrations or inner branches in the current group. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included technical success and 30 day stroke.

Results: A total of 21 patients underwent arch PM-FBEVAR, with 7 in the early group and 14 in the current group. Severe comorbidities were present in both groups including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (43% vs 36%), prior open ascending aortic repair (57% vs 43%), and prior stroke (86% vs 21%), respectively. Technical success was the same (86% vs 86%, p=1.0). Fluoroscopy time (56 vs 24 min, p=0.012) and in-hospital death (43% vs 0%, p=0.026) were significantly lower in the current group. A 30 day stroke rate (29% vs 7%, p=0.247) was non-significantly decreased in the current group. All-cause mortality was 100% vs 7% during median follow-up of 8 and 6 months (p<0.001). Three deaths in the early group were related to their aortic arch repair including aortic rupture during endograft advancement and 2 postoperative strokes.

Conclusion: There is a significant learning curve associated with aortic arch PM-FBEVAR. This study suggests that gained experience, use of the spine trigger wire technique, and precise creation of fenestrations or inner branches can lead to a shorter procedure time and lower complications.Clinical ImpactPhysician modified fenestrated branched endografting is feasible for the aortic arch. The high rate of stroke and perioperative mortality was reduced with incorporation of self-orienting spine trigger wire and anatomically specific inner branch creation.